Despite numerous attempts by Bertelsmann AG to dismiss the lawsuits filed against it for funding Napster, it will have to, at least, go for a summary judgment. That is because U.S. District Court Judge Marilyn Patel denied Bertelsmann's request to dismiss the case.
Bertelsmann signed a deal with Napster in 2000 and later invested over $80M in the service, which kept the P2P company running up until 2002, when it finally filed for Chapter 11. In early 2003 Bertelsmann was sued by several record labels seeking $17 billion in damages.
The German media giant insists that the funding was intended to keep Napster alive in order to turn it into a legal music service. Judge Patel, however, said that the case has to be answered in court.
"Plaintiffs' allegations that defendants exercised full operational control over Napster during periods in which Napster remained a conduit for infringing activity may be wholly unfounded... Regardless, such questions must be left for resolution upon motions for summary judgment or at trial," Patel wrote.
Bertelsmann will probably repeat its demands for a dismissal when discovery of evidence is complete.
Source: The Register
The German media giant insists that the funding was intended to keep Napster alive in order to turn it into a legal music service. Judge Patel, however, said that the case has to be answered in court.
"Plaintiffs' allegations that defendants exercised full operational control over Napster during periods in which Napster remained a conduit for infringing activity may be wholly unfounded... Regardless, such questions must be left for resolution upon motions for summary judgment or at trial," Patel wrote.
Bertelsmann will probably repeat its demands for a dismissal when discovery of evidence is complete.
Source: The Register
